GDT: May 22 • Quarterfinal • Canada 2, Finland 3

[tigervixxxen]

Too bad Canada, I was pulling for ya. Didn't play a bad game today just couldn't capitalize. I didn't mind not watching a collection of all-stars and gave me an excuse to watch one of my favorite players a bit longer.

 

[FiLe]

I can't disagree with you there. I'm sure there are a lot of Europeans that get overlooked for depth positions. I just don't think that makes the nhl overrated. There are only a handful of top 6/top 4 guys in Europe that could play the same spot in the nhl.

No argument from me either, but that still doesn't turn over the point that it has become far harder to predict the outcome of games solely by comparing the number of NHLers.

Let's keep in mind that even in the NHL, it's a common tactic to play ones 3rd or 4th line against the opposition's top unit to hamper and slow down their play. If these relatively unknown euros are on the same level as the depth options in the NHL, they can well enough pull off the same in international play.

 

[Canuck21t]

NHL Canadiens

30 SCRIVENS Ben L 188/6'2'' 88/194 11 Sep 1986 Edmonton Oilers
34 REIMER James L 188/6'2'' 95/209 15 Mar 1988 Toronto Maple Leafs
35 PETERS Justin L 185/6'1'' 96/212 30 Aug 1986 Carolina Hurricanes
Defenders
3 BIEKSA Kevin R 185/6'1'' 90/198 16 Jun 1981 Vancouver Canucks
4 ELLIS Ryan R 178/5'10'' 80/176 3 Jan 1991 Nashville Predators
5 GARRISON Jason L 188/6'2'' 99/218 13 Nov 1984 Vancouver Canucks
24 RIELLY Morgan L 185/6'1'' 93/205 9 Mar 1994 Toronto Maple Leafs
27 COBURN Braydon L 192/6'4'' 100/220 27 Feb 1985 Philadelphia Flyers
44 GUDBRANSON Erik R 195/6'5'' 98/216 7 Jan 1992 Florida Panthers
57 MYERS Tyler R 203/6'8'' 103/227 1 Feb 1990 Buffalo Sabres
Forwards
7 TURRIS Kyle R 185/6'1'' 77/170 14 Aug 1989 Ottawa Senators
10 SCHENN Brayden L 185/6'1'' 86/190 22 Aug 1991 Philadelphia Flyers
11 HUBERDEAU Jonathan L 185/6'1'' 86/190 4 Jun 1993 Florida Panthers
14 BURROWS Alex L 185/6'1'' 86/190 11 Apr 1981 Vancouver Canucks
19 HODGSON Cody R 183/6'0'' 83/183 18 Feb 1990 Buffalo Sabres
20 BROUWER Troy R 191/6'3'' 97/214 17 Aug 1985 Washington Capitals
21 READ Matt R 183/6'0'' 85/187 14 Jun 1986 Philadelphia Flyers
23 MONAHAN Sean L 188/6'2'' 84/185 12 Oct 1994 Calgary Flames
25 CHIMERA Jason L 190/6'3'' 97/214 2 May 1979 Washington Capitals
29 MACKINNON Nathan R 183/6'0'' 83/183 1 Sep 1995 Colorado Avalanche
42 WARD Joel R 186/6'1'' 103/227 2 Dec 1980 Washington Capitals
43 KADRI Nazem L 183/6'0'' 86/190 6 Oct 1990 Toronto Maple Leafs
55 SCHEIFELE Mark R 188/6'2'' 89/196 15 Mar 1993 Winnipeg Jets

VS

NHL finns:

35 RINNE Pekka L 196/6'5'' 89/196 3 Nov 1982 Nashville Predators
56 HAULA Erik L 180/5'11'' 85/187 23 Mar 1991 Minnesota Wild
12 JOKINEN Olli L 189/6'2'' 95/209 5 Dec 1978 Winnipeg Jets

NHL is overrated these days after the sharp top point these players are not even so much better than Liiga and KHL players as many people think.

I thought Canada was better overall until that costly mistake by Myers. NHLers are still better to my eyes. Just because of a costly mistake that could have happened to anyone isn't proof that non-NHLers as good as NHLers overall. There are overlaps of course.

 

[FiLe]

I thought Canada was better overall until that costly mistake by Myers. NHLers are still better to my eyes. Just because of a costly mistake that could have happened to anyone isn't proof that non-NHLers as good as NHLers overall. There are overlaps of course.

I don't think anybody here is disputing the fact that overall NHLers tend to be better than non-NHLers. The gap, however, may be far more narrow than most people think.

Remember the math. 20 players times 30 equals 600. Far less than even a thousand players have room in the most elite league of the world. And even if hockey isn't exactly a global sport like, say, soccer, there's bound to be more talent than that.

 

[tucker3434]

No argument from me either, but that still doesn't turn over the point that it has become far harder to predict the outcome of games solely by comparing the number of NHLers.

Let's keep in mind that even in the NHL, it's a common tactic to play ones 3rd or 4th line against the opposition's top unit to hamper and slow down their play. If these relatively unknown euros are on the same level as the depth options in the NHL, they can well enough pull off the same in international play.

I'd still say that anybody can win one game on neutral ice. I'd bet Canada would win a 7 game series (and I'm not Canadian).

But I'm not really commenting on whether or not they can win, just whether or not the NHL is overrated. NHL is, and will be, clearly the best league by a lot.

 

[Danish Pastry]

There is something to say about chemistry in small tournies.Canada wins gold at best on best because their skill can dominate almost any nation they overcome the lack of chemistry. If I'm not mistaken and I could be but don't many of the players from the other countries play more prelim games together. Anyway go Finland I will be cheering for my boy hertl to win.

 

[jaateloauto]

What kind of an idiot puts Scrivens in when you could have started Reimer! Well thanks for the win Tippett!

And speaking of NHL vs. other leagues; why do you think Finland even had a chance? In net was the best NHLer from either team.

 

[FiLe]

I'd still say that anybody can win one game on neutral ice. I'd bet Canada would win a 7 game series (and I'm not Canadian).

But I'm not really commenting on whether or not they can win, just whether or not the NHL is overrated. NHL is, and will be, clearly the best league by a lot.

The NHL is definitely not overrated. In any best-on-best, overwhelming majority of the players tend to be NHLers and that's not a coincidence. The best 20 of any elite country consists of almost nothing but NHLers.

However, that is still no indicator of how a roster full of NHLers can fare against a good euro team, espcially if said NHLers are more or less 2nd rate. The field tends to get far more even, methinks. Even a best-of-seven win is not out of the question. I wouldn't call the euros favorites, but they are not without their chances.

This only in general sense, of course. If this particular Finland and this particular Canada met in a best-of-seven series, I'd say the Canadians are going to take it. Even Rinne couldn't stand that much on his head what is required to steal four games.

 

[llwyd]

No it's not, this is the Skoda Cup, especially in an Olympic year.

Take away Pekka Rinne and this finnish team would barely make it out of the first round in the finnish liiga playoffs.

It's almost the crime of the century that Finland won today. Canada had at least 4 posts (+ Scrivens gifted us a goal)and dominated the game.

But that's hockey, wins are not always deserved.

Yeah, my heart bleeds too for Canada, Latvia and Switzerland. I have bitter tears in my eyes thinking all this unfairness. I think it should be against the rules to have better goalies than the opposition, it's not really a part of hockey, or to get more points in the round robin if you play badly (hmm, this goes for Canada too, they are often unimpressive in the round robin only to UNFAIRLY raise their game for the play-offs).

I don't know whether to laugh or cry at our Finnish mentality of "supporting" our team like the rope supports the hanged man... People still think that we are badmouthing our team to counter-jinx, but no it's god honest hyper-pessism and negativity. WE WON THE BLOODY GAME FAIRLY, too bad for Canada that they couldn't score and too bad that we had that Rinne hat trick against them. All that skating in the corners and all those semi-chances went to nothing. And too bad that a goal post is not counted as half a goal, then Canada would have won 3.5 - 3. Would, should what ever, did not.

And nothing against Canada and their fans here - I think they are rather perplexed about this post-game self-flagellation by many Finns...

 

[Canuckistani]

Shame on some of my fellow Canadians who downgrade this tournament as unimportant. It may not be as important as the Olys or SC to us but it is still a matter of pride. I am PISSED at this result.

Canada underachieves at this event, but I was pissed for all of 30 seconds and then I was on to other things.

I was actually more disappointed to see Belarus lose a heart-breaker on home ice vs Sweden.

 

[Canuckistani]

And nothing against Canada and their fans here - I think they are rather perplexed about this post-game self-flagellation by many Finns...

Yeah I certainly don't get it. Granted, Finland's played poorly thus far but the team clearly has potential.

The result today should surprise no one.

Finland has six players from their bronze-medal squad in Sochi; only Russia has more (seven, last I checked). Canada had none.

 

[Jussi]

Yeah I certainly don't get it. Granted, Finland's played poorly thus far but the team clearly has potential.

The result today should surprise no one.

Finland has six players from their bronze-medal squad in Sochi; only Russia has more (seven, last I checked). Canada had none.

It's not who's in but rather who replaced the ones that aren't in from the Olympic squads. Our replacements shouldn't have been able to match against a properly coached and built Canada. Had we played against the US (again), I think we would have lost. Although they had a weaker squad than last year, they have a system that suits the big and small ice. Plus our KHL players get constantly outmuscled by the likes of Craig Smith. Meanwhile Canada looked at times like the Anaheim Ducks who didn't know how to break-out out of their zone, almost clueless. Is it really that hard to build a Hawks/Kings like system throughout Canadian national teams from the juniors up so that teams could use it, no matter the roster? Or does Hockey Canada put focus on player development from a skill perspective while ignoring tactical training?

 

[Quebec Knows How*]

What kind of an idiot puts Scrivens in when you could have started Reimer! Well thanks for the win Tippett!

And speaking of NHL vs. other leagues; why do you think Finland even had a chance? In net was the best NHLer from either team.

Anyone with a brain. Scrivens is easily superior to Reimer.

 

[Territory]

Anyone with a brain. Scrivens is easily superior to Reimer.

Untrue.

Reimer was better then Scrivens, that's why Scrivens was traded.

A small tournament is not as good a sample size as a whole (shortened) NHL season.

 

[Yakushev72]

I can't disagree with you there. I'm sure there are a lot of Europeans that get overlooked for depth positions. I just don't think that makes the nhl overrated. There are only a handful of top 6/top 4 guys in Europe that could play the same spot in the nhl.

The avs just signed a couple good young undrafted Europeans. I hope they surprise me, but history says they won't.

True, but even the A Teamers have a hard time with European back benchers. The party line is that they are not supposed to, but it happens all the time. Look at the Olympics. Canada beat Norway, but not by much (3-1). They beat Latvia 2-1. This is Canada's A Team, and they are supposed to roll over these teams, but they often don't. Yes, they are stars of the NHL, but the Norwegians and Latvians play pro hockey for a living as well, and the gap isn't as wide as the party line touts. In that respect, you could say that the NHL is a bit overrated.

 

[DyerMaker66*]

Untrue.

Reimer was better then Scrivens, that's why Scrivens was traded.

A small tournament is not as good a sample size as a whole (shortened) NHL season.

Is that why Rask was traded instead of Pogge?

 

[Yakushev72]

It's not who's in but rather who replaced the ones that aren't in from the Olympic squads. Our replacements shouldn't have been able to match against a properly coached and built Canada. Had we played against the US (again), I think we would have lost. Although they had a weaker squad than last year, they have a system that suits the big and small ice. Plus our KHL players get constantly outmuscled by the likes of Craig Smith. Meanwhile Canada looked at times like the Anaheim Ducks who didn't know how to break-out out of their zone, almost clueless. Is it really that hard to build a Hawks/Kings like system throughout Canadian national teams from the juniors up so that teams could use it, no matter the roster? Or does Hockey Canada put focus on player development from a skill perspective while ignoring tactical training?

Neither. The system focuses on moving kids up through the ranks of junior hockey. More emphasis is put on hockey competition than skills development by the time kids reach 15. Once kids are in the CHL, they really function like NHL or AHL players, with a long season of league competition. By age 16, they either have the basic arsenal of hockey skills or they don't.

 

[snizzbone*]

Untrue.

Reimer was better then Scrivens, that's why Scrivens was traded.

A small tournament is not as good a sample size as a whole (shortened) NHL season.

Scrivens game was reformed by the LA goalie coach.

 

[Lennu32]

Yeah I certainly don't get it. Granted, Finland's played poorly thus far but the team clearly has potential.

The result today should surprise no one.

Finland has six players from their bronze-medal squad in Sochi; only Russia has more (seven, last I checked). Canada had none.

Well, Finland has been playing so poorly, that the only way is up

To be fair, Finnish team would have 3-4 less Sochi players if some of our better players would have been healthy to play in Sochi...

Canada was clearly better team, but in do or die-game anyone can win. Canada made some mistakes and Finland made them pay and Rinne showed why he is one of the elite goalkeepers in NHL and Scrivens why he's not.

And this is Finnish C-team, we would have much better team by those euro players who declined. And A-team would be almost 100% NHL players.

We have been lucky twice in this tournament, third time's the charm?

 

[llwyd]

Canada was clearly better team, but in do or die-game anyone can win. Canada made some mistakes and Finland made them pay and Rinne showed why he is one of the elite goalkeepers in NHL and Scrivens why he's not.

Well, maybe in figure skating Canada would have been the better team - puck possession and winning the shots actually in themselves do not a better team make (I remember this bitterly recalling the Finland team of mid-90's to early 00's who always won the shots and always circled endlessly in corners...) To be the better team you need to score more goals than the opponent, it's a scoring game, not a style game - and having a good goalie is actually an essential part of any good team, it's not outside of the sport, or somehow external to being the better team, for god's sake.

 

[FinRuutu]

Its a goal scoring game and goalie is part of the team.

Time on attack and shots don't matter if big numbers don't correlate.

 

[Mestaruus]

To sum it up:
-Finland B vs Canada D .
-Finland had advantages for being a huge underdog before the game and we had a better goalie.
-Luck was a little bit more on the Finnish side also, Juuso Hietanen's tying 2-2 goal, few Canadian shots that hit on the post in period 1 and 2 and our last goal. Okay those things weren't purely luck, but some parts of them were.

 

[Snowsii]

Olli Jokinen has come back!

 

[AstrophysicalJet]

I don't know if this was posted, but I have had time to digest the loss now, so here goes.

Damn funny.

 

[EverybodyLovesRay]

To sum it up:
-Finland C vs Canada C/D .
-Finland had advantages for being a huge underdog before the game and we had a better goalie.
-Luck was a little bit more on the Finnish side also, Juuso Hietanen's tying 2-2 goal, few Canadian shots that hit on the post in period 1 and 2 and our last goal. Okay those things weren't purely luck, but some parts of them were.

Fixed.